Yong Li was a senior software engineer in Raytheon's Marlborough facility. She was constantly harassed because of her race although she was a valuable employee in Raytheon. see Spare Change Newspaper report, or
When Li was intimidated by her ex-manager Jen Lewis, Li reported to the HR about her personal safety concern. Raytheon, through company counselor John Didio, interrogated Li "do you want to kill someone?" As a result, Li was traumatized and became long term disabled ...
Li lost health, lost career, and lived on disability benefit. Her husband left her.
Raytheon fixed doctor's report
Yong Li's handout to Raytheon
Discussion Center for Raytheon: 1st Thread, 2nd Thread
Yong Li's Petition to US Supreme Court
docket sheet in the state appeal court: 2007-P-0156 (Yong Li v. Raytheon Company, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 1115 (Table, Text in Westlaw), Unpublished Rule 1:28 Disposition, 2008 WL 783404)
docket sheet in the Mass. Supreme Court: FAR-17039
Workers Compensation case in state appeal court2008-P-1446
US Supreme Court 08-526
US Supreme Court 08-909
... a sua sponte Dismissal for Failure to State a Claim was made by the State Appeal court of Massachusetts (William Cowin, Malcolm Graham, Cynthia Cohen, JJ), and that deprived Li's due process. The ruling was un-precedent in US history. There was no hearing, no opportunity to amend complaint, no adversarial process.
To protest against the sua sponte ruling, Yong Li held a big sign "fraud ruling, injustice" in the court house, and she fell down from the balcony and got serious injured … see Boston Globe.
Li was sent to Massachusetts General Hospital. She was branded as delusional disorder and forced to take anti-psychotic medication, although a Mandarin speaking doctor diagnosed her no psychosis symptoms … see Li in MGH.
Fraud Ruling
Cowin W, Cohen C, Graham M, JJ
sua sponte dismissal 4 failure 2 state a claim
Yong Li v. Raytheon
Dishonest judges William Cowin, Malcolm Graham, Cynthia Cohen, JJ of Massachusetts Appeal Court, made a sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim (Yong Li v. Raytheon Company, 2007-P-0156), which became first such ruling in US history. The trick is that they did not identify the dismissal as sua sponte, because they simply “assumed” that the issue of Rule 12(b)(6) had been raised in the low court, so that they applied case law Conant v. Sherwin L. Kantrovitz, P.C., 29 Mass. App. Ct. 998, 998 (1990) to dismiss the discrimination lawsuit against Raytheon. In fact, the issue of Rule 12(b)(6) had never been raised, briefed, or argued. Without such mis-assumption, the Appeal Court would not be able to dismiss the case. Originally, the Middlesex Superior court dismissed this case for a pending action in federal court. On appeal, the judges panel ruled that the dismissal erred, but they did not remanded the case back to the low court. Instead, the sua sponte dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) came out. There was no hearing, no opportunity to amend complaint, no adversarial process. Moreover, Yong Li was deprived of the right to appeal, because the dismissal directly occurred in the Appeal Court. Later, they denied Li's petition for rehearing, despite she pointed out the mis-assumption in the petition.
3 comments:
Spare Change News - One Woman's Struggle
Februray 14 - February 27, 2008
Yong Li
When I worked as a software engineer at Raytheon’s Marlborough facility, I was a valuable employee and contributed greatly.
In 2001, I was accused of using a technical discussion to attack a group leader, and received a negative performance review in 2002. I am Chinese, and filed an internal discrimination complaint, after which I transferred to Langley, Virginia in 2003.
In 2004, upon my return to Marlborough, I began to suffer widespread retaliation for my prior complaint. I was withheld from permanent assignments, asked to go Towson, Maryland, and told that my name was on a layoff list. When I found a permanent assignment on my own, my manager denied that he ever said that my name was on the list. The team manager, who was the subject of the complaint, aggressively stared at me and attempted to intimidate me whenever we were alone. The staring incidents continued for eight months, and eventually caused me to worry about my personal safety. When I addressed these safety concerns, Raytheon set a meeting with Human Resources for August 3, 2004, into which they embedded a mental evaluation. I was not informed of this evaluation, and thought the counselor, John Didio, was an investigator.
During the meeting, I claimed Mr. Didio did not ask why I felt unsafe. The first question he asked as “Do you want to kill someone?” When I answered “For this question, you should ask them, “Didio became excited. He put on a very sneaky and sneering face and stared at me, just like a hungry animal meeting his prey. He asked “Do you want to kill someone or do you want to kill yourself?” and with each “do you want to” followed a finger pointing at me. Gripped with panic, I felt traumatized and raped.
Raytheon stopped me from speaking out about what had happened, and ordered me to se a psychiatrist. Then Raytheon hid the doctor’s report and told me to go back to work and threatened to terminate my employment, despite the doctor’s statement that I suffered “acute mental illness” and was not fit to work.
I had no history of mental illness but suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder due to the August 3, meeting, and eventually became disabled long-term.
I then filed a workers comp claim against Raytheon’s insurer, discrimination claim against Raytheon, and a malpractice claim against Mr. Didio.
The workers comp judge adopted Raytheon doctors’ reports, which opined that I had a non-work related psychiatric condition that led to problems at work, but nothing identified a single cause for the disorder. The judge ignored the impartial doctor’s opinion as well as my own doctor’s opinion.
The workers comp judge adopted Raytheon witnesses’ testimonies that Mr. Didio asked “do you want to harm anyone.” The judge ruled that “Mr. Didio spoke in a way that would not alarm anyone” and “Mr. Didio did not intend to harass Ms. Li, nor did he harass Ms. Li”, but I “was confused.” The judge dismissed my claim, which is now in appeal.
The state judge dismissed the malpractice claim against Mr. Didio. During the hearing, the judge said “I don’t think you do [have the right of consent]. And maybe I’m wrong, and that’s why they do have courts of review, appellate review.” I was forced to appeal.
The federal judge dismissed the discrimination claim without hearing. The Circuit court affirmed it, so my next step is the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case is a cautionary tale: for employees, do not address safety issues under harassment. For companies, remember: a discriminatory remark can reverberate for a long, long time.
This is absolutely so wrong. This is why so many women do not come forward. Lets just go back to the 60's!! Women had to take it!!
Please help Yong Li and others like her and every female that you have ever loved and cared about!! Simply glue and paste:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-60s-type-discrimination-in-the-work-place-now
I agree Raytheon HR department is a boat load of crap. They want some thing bad to happen to wait to do anything. But the way they handle thing will come back on this in a way it will open there eyes in there pockets.......
Post a Comment